Need help please (sales rep lied to me)

[pedro47]

I never knew when a timeshare sell person LIPS were moving they would tell you a lie.

This is why I liked this website.
"Where Knowledge Is Power." BY BACON.

 

[lawyeronthebeach]

Isn't there a clause in the contract that states that the contract is only what's valid and anything said before by sales reps or personnel is not valid and the signer acknowledges that on the contract signing.

I don't know what was in OP's contract, but there usually is a clause like that. But I don't think a salesperson's misrepresentations was the legal issue here that supported the rescission. I think it was more along the lines that this apparently uncommon "partial week" contract was ambiguous as to what partial week meant. It was a key term and if there was no mutual understanding as to what it meant, and the contract didn't define it, then there was no meeting of the minds and no contract was formed. This is the stronger basis for rescission. If the contract had clearly defined "partial week," then what was spoken would matter a whole lot less.

 

[HuskerATL]

Then there is the salesman's license to lie clause...

 

[CalGalTraveler]

@lawyeronthebeach here is OP's original wording:

"Then I found I bought 4 nights M-Thur at Grand Islander. The contract and the Deed did not mention M-Th either. It just says partial week 2."

M-Thursday is 4 nights is a "partial week." by definition. Sure it is not a weekend but it is still a partial week. It sounds like they knew they bought a partial week. Perhaps they should have clarified during the sales meeting rather than creating drama on the Internet and screwing a consumer advocate that was trying to help them.

I don't know where you can rent open season for a week for $245 (but I haven't looked.) But open season programs are not in the contract and the contract states that those programs can change at any time.

 

[lawyeronthebeach]

@lawyeronthebeach here is OP's original wording:

"Then I found I bought 4 nights M-Thur at Grand Islander. The contract and the Deed did not mention M-Th either. It just says partial week 2."

The second sentence here is key. The contract and deed were ambiguous as to what she actually purchased. When the language of the contract is ambiguous as to a key term and there are differing opinions as to what the parties intended, then it means no contract was formed and it should be rescinded.

 

[HuskerATL]

@lawyeronthebeach here is OP's original wording:

"Then I found I bought 4 nights M-Thur at Grand Islander. The contract and the Deed did not mention M-Th either. It just says partial week 2."

M-Thursday is 4 nights is a "partial week." by definition. Sure it is not a weekend but it is still a partial week. It sounds like they knew they bought a partial week. Perhaps they should have clarified rather than creating drama on the Internet and screwing a consumer advocate that was trying to help them.

I don't know where you can rent open season for a week for $245 (but I haven't looked.) But open season programs are not in the contract and the contract states that those programs can change at any time.

You are only guaranteed your stay at the property where you own based on the deed....that is it. The rest can be cancelled/changed at any time...per the club rules. The contract doesn't go into the "perks"....just the deed ownership.

From the club rules:

 

[THSMTHS]

We went to Vegas in July and attended a Hilton presentation. We did not plan to buy. Hilton sales rep started talking about open season booking at $50 to $245 per week once we join and decide to book using cash. I thought this was a great deal. She confirmed with us several times. I asked her to show me how to book these open season booking. She said she could show me after my account was activated. During signing I saw some wording like open season booking $75 to $2000 per night. I stopped and questioned her again. She reassured me. She also said 5800 points will have 7 night studio in high season and 14 nights off season.. I did not even negotiate the price. After we got home, I waited for my account to be activated. Then I discovered I could not find anything at $245 per week. Then I found I bought 4 nights M-Thur at Grand Islander. The contract and the Deed did not mention M-Th either. It just says partial week 2.

I have been very upset and angry. I could not eat or sleep. How could the rep lie to me? I trusted her. Is she still a human being? How can Hilton condone such actions? The rep will not return my texts.

I wrote to Hilton President and General Counsel. Finally someone called me. She would not disclose her real name. Calling herself Ms. G. She wanted to offer me "a ton of points". I said No. I will not want to step into Hilton anymore. Then she wanted to schedule a conference call with the rep, myself and her. So far nothing has been scheduled yet.

What are your suggestions? Any input is greatly appreciated.

We were fortunate, when we were at Marbrisa (Carlsbad, California) on Sept. 22, for a Hilton presentation. The package was purchased to compare Hiltons, to Marriotts and Vistana. Part of the one week package was a required presentation. Sales agent there was very low key. When asked why we were there, response was that it was a requirement for the package. After telling him, the resort fell short of Marriott and Vistana quality and there was no desire to purchase, he knew we were not candidates and let us leave as soon as possible.

Based on many of our timeshare presentation experiences, most sales people will promise anything to entice purchases. Too late, you find half truths.

On one encounter, we got burned on financing with Vistana. If we would have been smart, we would have walked, instead of believing the agent. This past week, a correction was finally made to a June transaction....way too long.

 

[raddoc]

Isn't there a clause in the contract that states that the contract is only what's valid and anything said before by sales reps or personnel is not valid and the signer acknowledges that on the contract signing.

I'm not familiar with other TS systems but with HGVC you're actually buying real estate (real property) with a recorded deed. With very few exceptions, the written contract is the only thing that matters when purchasing real property.

 

[pedro47]

I'm not familiar with other TS systems but with HGVC you're actually buying real estate (real property) with a recorded deed. With very few exceptions, the written contract is the only thing that matters when purchasing real property.

In the beginning of timeshare the majority of timeshare were sold with a deeded week.

 

[HuskerATL]

In the beginning of timeshare the majority of timeshare were sold with a deeded week.

Of course, if you believe all the FB scuttlebutt, which I don't, they are moving HGV to a trust...

 

[dioxide45]

IMHO...The way the OP handled this was overly dramatic. Although HGVC has some culpability it sounds like OP and her husband did not read the contract yet she wants to blame everyone else for their lack of due diligence.

It sounds like she screwed the consumer advocate that was trying to help her too and did not read that contract either.

It sounds like HGVC did the right thing.

What a bunch of needless drama.

I don't take it as not reading the contract but fundamentally not understanding what they were buying (partial week) and thinking verbal promises somehow held up over a written contract (open time pricing).

 

[CalGalTraveler]

I don't take it as not reading the contract but fundamentally not understanding what they were buying (partial week) and thinking verbal promises somehow held up over a written contract (open time pricing).

No different than anyone else that comes onto these forums wanting to rescind. Nothing new in this case.

At least they knew they bought a partial week at Grand Islander.

 

[CalGalTraveler]

The second sentence here is key. The contract and deed were ambiguous as to what she actually purchased. When the language of the contract is ambiguous as to a key term and there are differing opinions as to what the parties intended, then it means no contract was formed and it should be rescinded.

It is possible but I bet that this was defined somewhere in the contract fine print or deed backup documents. This is a large corporation with high paid lawyers to write these contracts.

How could they sell a partial week deed without defining this? They would run the risk of overselling certain partial weeks which could result in fraud for selling real estate they don't own. For example, if they sold two Mon -Friday VOI instead of a Friday to Monday VOI and Monday to Friday VOI that make up one week out of 52 from inventory.

I am skeptical. It is possible that corporations overlook things but deed inventory is not one of them.

We must remember that the OP failed to read the contract, is not a lawyer and we are only hearing her side of the story (which may have its own biases) so we will never know.

 

[frank808]

@lawyeronthebeach here is OP's original wording:

"Then I found I bought 4 nights M-Thur at Grand Islander. The contract and the Deed did not mention M-Th either. It just says partial week 2."

M-Thursday is 4 nights is a "partial week." by definition. Sure it is not a weekend but it is still a partial week. It sounds like they knew they bought a partial week. Perhaps they should have clarified during the sales meeting rather than creating drama on the Internet and screwing a consumer advocate that was trying to help them.

I don't know where you can rent open season for a week for $245 (but I haven't looked.) But open season programs are not in the contract and the contract states that those programs can change at any time.

OP said they were promised that they were told open season was starting at $50 a WEEK. OP was primarily focusing on that one aspect from her posts so it seems.

I learned a long time ago this phrase "if it sounds too good to be true, it probably is." You cant get a motel 6 for less than $30 a day before taxes. Heck, the transient accommodations tax alone at Hilton Hawaiian Village is more than $50 a week for a studio!

 

[Passepartout]

Take a look at my post #7 in this thread. Like it or not, the evidence is that it works.

 

[CalGalTraveler]

OP said they were promised that they were told open season was starting at $50 a WEEK. OP was primarily focusing on that one aspect from her posts so it seems.

I learned a long time ago this phrase "if it sounds too good to be true, it probably is." You cant get a motel 6 for less than $30 a day before taxes. Heck, the transient accommodations tax alone at Hilton Hawaiian Village is more than $50 a week for a studio!

Agree that the HHV transient taxes are more than that. It is quite possible that the rep said $50/day or perhaps $250/day. Remember, this OP never read the contract and didn't ask questions about what a partial week is or even where the open season clause was when signing.

This is a strong indication that details are not her and her DH's strong suit and she may have recalled this entire interaction incorrectly as well. Sometimes people hear things they want to hear even if it is not accurate.

I recognize that sales reps frequently misstate things, but I don't find this OP has much credibility given the evidence of how she and her DH did not read the consumer advocate's contract and misinterpreted that interaction as well. What a mess.

 

[muscae]

I doubt the veracity of everything the OP wrote. I doubt that anyone at HGVC would comment on this story to a journalist. It is likely a work of fiction.

 

[billymach4]

@billymach4
Thank you for sharing Green Tea's story (aka Ling Lu Yamaki) in Elliot.

View attachment 82431

@alwysonvac I am very happy to share this. I saw this this his article in yesterday morning and instantly knew this had to be the same story. Obviously this has struck a nerve with many of us here.

Whoever the real @Green Tree is I really wish he or she would come back and embrace the real outcome with all of us. As I already mentioned I felt like we were just tossed aside after the OP got what he or she wanted. Perhaps the OP feels ashamed or frustrated by the many comments good or bad. I want to openly invite @Green Tree back and we would welcome further details. Don't take any comments or opinions seriously. Take it all in stride as you have taken on the Goliath in this fight and come out victorious!

The fact that the OP did get a refund past the rescission date shows a defined weakness in the process. Perhaps it was the bad publicity that the OP tenaciously spread? Perhaps it was a well written demand Legal Letter. It was probably a combination of all of the above!

 

[Mongoose]

The fact that the OP did get a refund past the rescission date shows a defined weakness in the process.

We don’t know this was a fact.

 

[billymach4]

We don’t know this was a fact.

I understand that. However it does appear to be the resolution based on the information we have to date.
I would like to believe a refund was in fact issued. I have my doubts as well. But I would like the OP to speak up again and not beaten down into submission by all of the speculation.

 

[billymach4]

Note to all. I have sent a DM to the OP kindly asking to return and provide us with the ending to this story. Let's please be cordial should the OP oblige .

 

[brp]

Note to all. I have sent a DM to the OP kindly asking to return and provide us with the ending to this story. Let's please be cordial should the OP oblige .

If the OP does return, I will try and comply with your request. Having finally read the Chris Elliott story, though, I doubt that the OP has any intention of returning. And, if she does, I have serious doubts about getting an honest accounting of what happened.

I think we were all cordial, and honest, while the OP was here. And we see how that worked out.

Cheers.

 

[Smclaugh99]

If the OP does return, I will try and comply with your request. Having finally read the Chris Elliott story, though, I doubt that the OP has any intention of returning. And, if she does, I have serious doubts about getting an honest accounting of what happened.

I think we were all cordial, and honest, while the OP was here. And we see how that worked out.

Cheers.

Spot on, brp! The advice given was helpful and kind. That Elliott article was pretty enlightening about the OP.

Sean

 

[Smclaugh99]

The second sentence here is key. The contract and deed were ambiguous as to what she actually purchased. When the language of the contract is ambiguous as to a key term and there are differing opinions as to what the parties intended, then it means no contract was formed and it should be rescinded.

Are you saying that after reviewing her contract? Or are you just taking her word at face value? The contracts are written by teams of experts proficient in legalese and given her flakey account of what transpired, I’m skeptical.

Sean

 

[Talent312]

All I'm going to say is that some people do a good job of acting
like airheads (a/k/a dingbats) when it gets them what they want.
.